[PATCH] D50993: [clangd] Increase stack size of the new threads on macOS

Dmitry.Kozhevnikov updated this revision to Diff 200432. Dmitry.Kozhevnikov changed the repository for this revision from rCTE Clang Tools Extra to rG LLVM Github Monorepo. Dmitry.Kozhevnikov added a comment. moved to the monorepo Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[PATCH] D50993: [clangd] Increase stack size of the new threads on macOS

Dmitry.Kozhevnikov added a comment. In D50993#1496946 , @ilya-biryukov wrote: > I'd still put it into LLVM to avoid platform-specific code in clangd. > Maybe `std::abort()` in the added `...Async` function if threads are > disabled? It's a bit unusual,

[PATCH] D50993: [clangd] Increase stack size of the new threads on macOS

Dmitry.Kozhevnikov added a comment. In D50993#1496250 , @ilya-biryukov wrote: > We should definitely land this. > > @Dmitry.Kozhevnikov, you don't have commit access, right? Should we land > these two revisions for you? The depending review was never d

[PATCH] D50462: Try building complete AST after a fatal error was emitted if further diagnostics are expected

Dmitry.Kozhevnikov added a comment. When lookin through the list of the fatal errors, I think there are different categories: 1. "Scary" ones - "module was relocated", "invalid vfs overlay file", we probably shouldn't try to recover from it 2. "User" errors (include not found, too many errors)

[PATCH] D50455: Continue emitting diagnostics after a fatal error

Dmitry.Kozhevnikov marked an inline comment as done. Dmitry.Kozhevnikov added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D50455#1193468, @ilya-biryukov wrote: > Nevertheless, I think this is moving clangd in the right direction and if we > see too many irrelevant errors, we should look into improvin

[PATCH] D50993: [clangd] Increase stack size of the new threads on macOS

Dmitry.Kozhevnikov added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D50993#1212130, @ilya-biryukov wrote: > @Dmitry.Kozhevnikov, do you need us to land the patch? > Any last changes you'd like to make? It’s blocked by the llvm review, which has some valid comments I’ll address today. After that,

[PATCH] D50993: [clangd] Increase stack size of the new threads on macOS

Dmitry.Kozhevnikov updated this revision to Diff 161954. Dmitry.Kozhevnikov added a comment. I've moved the platform-specific implementation to LLVM/Support/Threading and created https://reviews.llvm.org/D51103. Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra https://reviews.llvm.org/D50993 Files: cla

[PATCH] D50993: [clangd] Increase stack size of the new threads on macOS

Dmitry.Kozhevnikov added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D50993#1207757, @jfb wrote: > Isn't this duplicating code in lib/Support/Unix/Threading.inc with a > different implementation? It's definitely duplicating how the thread is created, however, here it's a bit more complicated as so

[PATCH] D50993: [clangd] Increase stack size of the new threads on macOS

Dmitry.Kozhevnikov added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D50993#1207357, @ilya-biryukov wrote: > 1. Can we put the helper that executes the tasks asynchronously with a stack > size into llvm's threading library (i.e. somewhere close to > `llvm::execute_on_thread`?) All platform-specific

[PATCH] D50993: [clangd] Increase stack size of the new threads on macOS

Dmitry.Kozhevnikov created this revision. Dmitry.Kozhevnikov added reviewers: ilya-biryukov, sammccall. Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, kadircet, arphaman, jkorous, MaskRay, ioeric. By default it's 512K, which is way to small for clang parser to run on. There is no way to do it via platfo

[PATCH] D50462: Try building complete AST after a fatal error was emitted if further diagnostics are expected

Dmitry.Kozhevnikov added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D50462#1203038, @vsapsai wrote: > Have you checked that produced AST is of sufficient quality to be used? > Because, for example, for invalid code error recovery tries to keep going but > the end result isn't always good. > In the

[PATCH] D50462: Try building complete AST after a fatal error was emitted if further diagnostics are expected

Dmitry.Kozhevnikov added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D50462#1193180, @arphaman wrote: > On a second look I think that there is value separating the concepts of > 'producing diagnostics' after hitting the fatal error (which is > SuppressAfterFatalError currently does), and trying to b

[PATCH] D50462: Try building complete AST after a fatal error was emitted if further diagnostics are expected

Dmitry.Kozhevnikov updated this revision to Diff 160848. Dmitry.Kozhevnikov changed the repository for this revision from rCTE Clang Tools Extra to rC Clang. Dmitry.Kozhevnikov added a comment. Addressed the review comment about separating "suppressing diagnostics" from "providing more complete

[PATCH] D50455: Continue emitting diagnostics after a fatal error

Dmitry.Kozhevnikov added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D50455#1193468, @ilya-biryukov wrote: > I'm a bit worried that clang may emit too many irrelevant errors, because it > may not cope nicely with those fatal errors, i.e. wasn't tested that > thoroughly in that mode. It sort of hap

[PATCH] D50455: Continue emitting diagnostics after a fatal error

Dmitry.Kozhevnikov updated this revision to Diff 160837. Dmitry.Kozhevnikov added a comment. Add a unit test which explicitly builds preamble/AST Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra https://reviews.llvm.org/D50455 Files: clangd/ClangdUnit.cpp clangd/Compiler.cpp test/clangd/missing-incl

[PATCH] D50455: Continue emitting diagnostics after a fatal error

Dmitry.Kozhevnikov added a comment. See also https://reviews.llvm.org/D50462 Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra https://reviews.llvm.org/D50455 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo

[PATCH] D50462: Try building complete AST after a fatal error was emitted if further diagnostics are expected

Dmitry.Kozhevnikov created this revision. Dmitry.Kozhevnikov added reviewers: ilya-biryukov, sammccall, milianw. Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, ioeric. Related to https://reviews.llvm.org/D50455 There is some code here and there that assume that no sane output is required if a fatal erro

[PATCH] D50455: Continue emitting diagnostics after a fatal error

Dmitry.Kozhevnikov created this revision. Dmitry.Kozhevnikov added reviewers: ilya-biryukov, sammccall. Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, arphaman, jkorous. By default, diagnostics are suppressed after a fatal error. Some fatal errors (notably, "file not found" for include directive) are com